I think I have a lot of company on this site when I say that for a long time now I've operated under the assumption that Bush had a hardcore group of supporters who had "drunk the Kool-Aid."
These folks, around 45% of the electorate, we've said, have erected a reality deflecting shield around themselves. Bush could French kiss Osama on primetime TV and his loyal followers would eagerly claim it was some new variation on the "flypaper" strategy.
Hence the focus on the handful of undecideds.
Hence the focus on turnout.....on mobilizing our base.
And while I still agree with those strategies, something has happened over the past few weeks that is causing me to question the conventional wisdom:
At least sixteen big city newspapers that endorsed Bush in 2000 have endorsed Kerry this year. A couple more that endorsed Dubya four years ago are declining to endorse anyone this time around.
The Kool-Aid drinkers? Oh, I'm still convinced they exist. But 45% of the electorate? I'm beginning to doubt this.
Any newspaper editorialist will tell you that it is his editorial board's duty to lead public opinion. They're very full of themselves this way. And their claim is not entirely without merit. They are opinion shapers.
But they're also mirrors of the population as a whole. And a dozen and a half editorial boards, serving an enormous chunk of the American population, have expressed enormous buyer's remorse. Bush is a disaster in every way, shape, and form.
They can't be alone in this feeling folks. Far from it.
Barring large-scale success of the Rethugs voter suppression efforts.......
Could we be looking at a Kerry blowout here folks?